TASER® Officer Safety Programs

Real World Results Overview

TASER Impact:
Reduce Lethal Force by up to 78%
Reduce Officer Injuries by up to 83%
Reduce Suspect Injuries by up to 80%
Reduce Use-of-Force litigation by up to 54%
Reduce Worker’s Comp Claims by up to 78%

protect life

“Why should TASER® Electronic Control Devices (ECDs) be
standard issue equipment for every officer?”
Because every officer deserves a safer job.
OFFICERS ARMED WITH TASER ECDs ARE LESS LIKELY:
TO BE INJURED
TO INJURE SUSPECTS
TO BE INVOLVED IN CITIZEN COMPLAINTS

OFFICERS ARMED WITH TASER ECDs ARE BETTER ABLE:
TO PROTECT THEMSELVES
TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC
TO SAVE LIVES

“I wish we had TASER technology my first year as Superintendent of the Chicago Police
Department. It may have prevented two lethal force incidents that occurred within a 24
hour period. Litigation from these two incidents alone cost the city over $25 million – more
than enough to have covered the cost of a full deployment of TASER devices to every officer
in Chicago.”
-Terry Hillard, Ret. Superintendent, Chicago Police Department

2	

TASER Officer Safety Programs

“How do TASER ECDs improve officer safety?”
TASER ECDs reduce officer injuries by up to 83%.
Officers don’t get paid to fight. Yet, the majority of officers injured on duty are injured during non-deadly force encounters. TASER
International offers a powerful means to subdue violent subjects that is safer compared to traditional hands-on force tactics. The
TASER ECDs allow officers to incapacitate dangerous or violent subjects from a distance - regardless of the physical size of the
officer and regardless of the size, strength and mental state of the subject.

The result?
Fewer officers are injured in the course of their duties.

Every Officer Deserves to Go Home Safely

ACTUAL RESULTS:
REDUCTION IN OFFICER INJURIES IN DEPARTMENTS WITH
TASER OFFICER SAFETY PROGRAMS*
Cincinnati Police Department			
Austin Police Department				
Orange County (FL) Sheriff ’s Office		
Columbus Police Department			
Cape Coral Police Department			
Topeka Police Department			
Omaha Police Department			

Down 56%
Down 50%
Down 80%
Down 23%
Down 93%
Down 46%
Down 47%

* Data shows actual results only and does not imply endorsement.

Real World Results Overview                         3

“What about financial impact?
How can officer safety impact my budget?”
Fewer officer injuries mean fewer Worker’s
Compensation claims and less officer downtime.
In 2002, the Granite City Police Department in Illinois was at risk of being privately uninsurable. Worker’s Compensation claims were
at an all time high. The department was given 12 months by its insurance carrier to improve its status and save their insurability.
Seventy percent of the major claims were incurred during interventions with mentally disturbed and/or impaired subjects wherein
officers were forced to physically engage subjects at close quarters. A three-part plan to reduce injury claims was implemented,
including defensive driver training, reconfiguring of the booking area, and implementation of a TASER Officer Safety Program.
Within the first year of the TASER Officer Safety Program, no officer injuries were incurred as a result of engaging combative subjects
and no lost time was claimed as a result of officer combat. In fact, force-related injury claims were completely eliminated for the
next two years.

GRANITE CITY, IL POLICE DEPARTMENT WORKER’S COMPENSATION EXPENSE

$740,172

$700,000

AMOUNT SPENT

$500,000

R

$454,192

$300,000

SER
TA

$100,000

2002

YEAR

4	

TASER Officer Safety Programs

RA

G
RO

P

NT
MI

CED

U
OD

$0

$0

2003

2004

“Does TASER technology reduce the number
of deadly force incidents?”
TASER ECDs save lives and reduce deadly force
by up to 78%.
TASER technology is not a replacement for lethal force. However, use of TASER electronic control devices in a dangerous
confrontation can frequently bring the situation under control and prevent the risk of escalation to deadly force. In fact, agencies
with TASER Officer Safety Programs report significant drops in deadly force levels. A recent field study of TASER ECDs at the
Columbus, Ohio Division of Police showed the TASER Officer Safety Program averted 14 potentially deadly force encounters over a
6-month period. In addition, the Miami and Seattle police departments experienced over 12 months without a deadly force
shooting – a record success attributed directly to the introduction of TASER Officer Safety Programs in 2004.
“The protection of life is bottom line in law enforcement and the Division’s TASER program and its investment into this new
technology has proven its worth.”
– Six-month study of TASER program, Columbus, OH Division of Police

ACTUAL RESULTS:
REDUCTION IN DEADLY FORCE
Phoenix Police Department			
Orange County (FL) Sheriff ’s Office		

Down 54%
Down 69%

Over 11,000 serious or fatal injuries have been avoided with TASER officer
safety programs.*
* Estimated from field data reports.

Real World Results Overview                         5

“What about the people we arrest?
How do TASER ECDs affect them?”
TASER ECDs reduce suspect injuries by up to 80%.
While most people know that a TASER ECD is certainly far safer to the recipient than a bullet from a firearm, many people do not realize that
a TASER system exposure represents a significantly lower risk of injury than traditional hands-on force tactics. When faced with a violent,
resistant subject – the use of a TASER device reduces the risk of injury not only to the officers involved, but the arrestee as well.

EXPECTED	INJURIES	PER	1,000	EXPOSURES
500

FIREARM*

500

BATON	STRIKE**

780

PUNCH**

780
450

KICK**
PLAYING	BASKETBALL***

4

TASER ****

2

INJURIES
DEATHS

200

400

600

800

1000

ACTUAL	RESULTS:
REDUCTION	IN	SUSPECT	INJURIES	WITH	TASER	PROGRAMS
Cincinnati
CincinnatiPolice
PoliceDepartment	
Department��
Austin
AustinPolice
PoliceDepartment	
Department� �
CapeCoral
CoralPolice
PoliceDepartment	
Department
Cape

Down35%	
Down 35%
Down
Down82%	
82%
Down68%	
68%
Down

ColumbusPolice
PoliceDepartment
Department	
Columbus
PhoenixPolice
PoliceDepartment�
Department	 �
Phoenix
Topeka
TopekaPolice
PoliceDepartment�
Department	 �

Down24%
Down 24%
Down67%
Down 67%
Down41%
41%
Down

* Electronic gun (TASER) injuries. Annals of Emergency Medicine 1987 Jan;16(1):73-8.  Ordog GJ, Wasserberger J, Schlater T, Balasubramanium S.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=3800082&dopt=Citation.	
** Source: Study of Use of Force at Los Angeles Police Department, Captain Greg Meyer. Original study available at http://home.earthlink.net/~gregmeyer/injury.html on the internet.
*** Source: NCAA Injury Surveillance System Summary (for athletic practices - games have higher injury rates).
**** Source: Human Effectiveness and Risk Characterization of the Electromuscular Incapacitation Device – A Limited Analysis of the TASER. Part 1: Technical Report. Part 2: Appendices. March 2005.

6	

TASER Officer Safety Programs

“How will my community react to the controversy
surrounding these devices?”
While the media reports a “TASER Controversy” public citizens
overwhelmingly and consistantly support TASER technology use.
POLLS: “Do you support police use of TASER systems?”
Arizona Republic

15%

South Bend Tribune

20%

85%

NBC Columbus

17%

80%

Yes

Should police continue to use TASER devices?

9%
8%
33%

6%
44%

Strongly Support
Somewhat Support
Not Sure
Somewhat Oppose
Strongly Oppose

Coventry, UK

10%

83%

90%

No

Do devices like TASER systems make communities safer?

10%
5%
32%

9%
44%

Strongly Agree
Somewhat Agree
Not Sure
Somewhat Disagree
Strongly Disagree

Real World Results Overview                         7

“Isn’t high voltage dangerous?”
It’s not the volts, but the amperes that matter for
electrical safety.
We tend to think of electricity as a harmful force to our bodies. Indeed, if lightning strikes or you stick your finger in an electrical
outlet high levels of electrical current can be quite dangerous. However, it’s important to know that not all electricity is harmful. In
fact, electricity is essential to the life process. All communication between the brain and body is conducted via electrical signals.
You cannot breathe nor can your heart beat without electricity – human life cannot exist without it.
TASER devices are designed to over-stimulate the command and control systems of the human body, transmitting controlled pulses
that are carefully designed to impair conscious control of the skeletal muscles without affecting the heart or other vital organs. As
shown below, it’s not the voltage that determines the effects of electricity on the body, but rather the amount of electric current
(measured in amperes) that matters most. While the TASER devices deliver a peak open-circuit voltage of up to 50,000 volts to allow
the TASER X26 discharge to arc through clothing, the average current delivered is only 0.0036 amperes.

Mother and daughter experience 20
million volt Van de Graff Generator at
science museum.

8	

TASER Officer Safety Programs

“Are there independent studies on TASER technology?”
Yes. TASER brand ECDs are among the most
extensively studied law enforcement devices in history.
Dozens of independent studies find that TASER devices, while not risk free,
are among the safest use-of-force alternatives available. In fact, we believe
TASER devices are among the most extensively studied weapons on the
market today. In addition to significant government and company sponsored
studies on our products, we believe TASER is the only weapons company in
the world with a scientific and medical advisory board. Our advisory board
includes world-class experts who provide critical insights to help us design
and test the safest devices possible.

TASER Scientific and
Medical Advisory Board
Hugh Calkins, MD

Director of the Electrophysiology Laboratory
Johns Hopkins University

Richard M. Luceri, MD

Director of Arrhythmia Center
Holy Cross Hospital

Mark Kroll, PhD

Adjunct Professor, Cal Poly
(Holds the most patents on cardiac devices of any person in
the world.)

James D. Sweeney, PhD

Chair-Dept of Bioengineering Florida Gulf States University
(Recognized expert on nerve and muscle stimulation.)
Partial List of Agencies / Journals That Have Published
Studies on TASER Devices*
• The Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Human Effects Center of Excellence,
United States Department of Defense
• Defence Scientific Advisory Council, United Kingdom
• Police Scientific Development Branch, United Kingdom
• Canadian Police Research Centre
• Hennepin County Medical Center Minneapolis, Minnesota
• University of California, San Diego
• University of Washington School of Medicine and Harvard Medical
School
• Florida Gulf States University
• Medical University of Vienna
• Potomac Institute for Policy Studies
• Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology
• Society of Academic Emergency Medicine
• The Alfred Hospital, Australia
• The Georgia Association of Chiefs of Police Executive Board
• Orange County Sheriff’s Office Florida, TASER Medical Task Force
• Wisconsin Department of Justice Law Enforcement Standards Board

* No endorsement is implied

Real World Results Overview                         9

“What about all of these tragic deaths in incidents
involving TASER device use?”
“Definitive research or evidence does not exist that
implicates a causal relationship between the use of
CEDs (TASER devices) and death.”
– “Technical Report of Conducted Energy Devices” (CEDs), Canadian Police Research Centre
of August 22, 2005

CHARACTERISTICS	OF	PERSONS	WHO	DIE	IN	POLICE	CUSTODY	WITHOUT	TRAUMA

97%

Men Ages
34 - 44

60%

Bizarre
Behavior

53%

Ingested
Drugs

27%

TASER ECD
Application

11%

Chemical
Spray

8%

Impact
Weapons

“Technical Report of Conducted Energy Devices” (CEDs), Canadian Police Research Centre. TR-01-2006 of August 22, 2005.

Each year, hundreds of people die in police custody of no readily apparent cause. Over time, as new technologies emerge, public
scrutiny is often dedicated to establishing these deaths as the responsibility of police officers or the use-of-force they employ. Ten
years ago, there was significant debate about the use of pepper spray and its perceived role in sudden in-custody death. Studies
have shown no significant link between pepper spray and these unfortunate incidents. Yet at the time, there was a great deal of
debate surrounding its use. Today, TASER systems are the tools under scrutiny, and the debate surrounding sudden in-custody
death has again resurfaced. However, a recent report by Dr. Jeffrey Ho, published in Police Magazine in August 2005, found that the
TASER device was used in only 27 percent of these tragic cases. The report stated that while, “Police weapon use does not appear
to be a predictive factor for in-custody deaths, personal behavior does.” One thing remains certain however, with an epidemic of
methamphetamine and other illicit drug use sweeping the country, sudden in-custody deaths and the rise of excited delirium are
challenges that are here to stay.

10	

TASER Officer Safety Programs

“Will officers be more prone to abuse TASER devices?”
TASER devices offer 3 levels of unprecedented
accountability.
1.

Anti-Felon Identification (AFID)

Each TASER Cartridge is serial numbered, bar-coded and
disperses 20-30 serialized confetti pieces when discharged
– this can determine which officer fired the TASER device.

2.

Enhanced Accountability
Reduces Citizen Complaints
Due to the unparalleled accountability in TASER
devices, agencies deploying TASER systems
report significant drops in citizen use-of-force
complaints.

DATAPORT TIME/DATE FIRING RECORDS

TASER devices provide a built-in audit tracking system. It records
the time and date of every trigger pull – verifying usage patterns
to corroborate an officer’s report or to audit an alleged misuse.

3.

NEW VIDEO & AUDIO INCIDENT RECORDING
The new TASER CAM™ records over
an hour of MPEG4 video and audio
data. An optional upgrade system,
the TASER CAM is compatible with
all TASER X26s and provides another
layer of accountability to corroborate
an officer’s report.

Cincinnati 	

	

Down 50%

Austin 	

	

	

Down 32%

Columbus		

	

Down 25%

Further, the audit capabilities of TASER devices
make it much easier to defend against frivolous
lawsuits. Several officers have reported their
careers were saved from baseless allegations of
abuse specifically because the dataport downloads
from the TASER device factually disproved the
allegations.

A study by the International Association of Chiefs of Police reports that when video is available, law
enforcement officers are exanerated in more than 96% of complaint cases.
– Police Chief, Vol. 71, No. 8, August 2004

Real World Results Overview                         11

“What about litigation – I hear TASER is involved in a number of
lawsuits?”
TASER ECDs reduce excessive force litigation by 54%.
– Michigan Municipal Risk Management Authority Study, 2004

While you may hear in the media about “all these TASER lawsuits,” the fact is that TASER International is
involved in relatively few use-of-force lawsuits, in comparison to the over 11,000 agencies that rely on
TASER weapons. TASER is establishing a solid track record of having these suits dismissed.
In 2003, the Michigan Municipal Risk Management Authority (MMRA) introduced a program to encourage
police agencies to deploy TASER ECDs with the goal of reducing risk and liability exposure. Under this
program, the MMRA would reimburse the agency for a portion of the cost to purchase and deploy
TASER systems. In this program 40 law enforcement agencies participated and deployed TASER devices.
During 2004, the first full year of the program, the number of excessive force claims at these agencies
collectively dropped 54%, from 48 claims in 2003 to 22 claims in 2004. There were a total of 432 TASER
device deployments, yet zero claims of excessive force related to the use of TASER devices. The TASER
ECDs likely played a key role in reducing excessive force claims by 26 cases year over year. At an average
cost of $250,000 per excessive force claim, a reduction of 26 cases translates to an approximate total
savings of $6.5 million.
Further, a TASER device was successfully employed in at least seven instances that likely would have
escalated to deadly force levels and resulted in wrongful death litigation were it not for the TASER device.
Wrongful death cases cost an average of $2.5 million in litigation / awards. If we assume that only three
of these cases would have escalated to deadly force, the successful non-lethal conclusion of these seven
cases likely averted an additional $7.5 million in
wrongful death claims.

ACTUAL RESULTS:

REDUCTION IN EXCESSIVE FORCE LITIGATION

•
•
•
•

40 plus agencies in study
432 TASER device deployments
Only 1 injury required hospitalization
Zero claims of excessive force

* Michigan Municipal Risk Management Authority Study, 2004

12	

TASER Officer Safety Programs

The net liability and litigation cost savings works
out to $3,500 per officer for the approximately
4,000 officers in the participating agencies. Is it
worth a 1-in-400 risk an agency will get a TASERrelated lawsuit if it can cut the overall use-of-force
litigation in half?

Excessive use-of-force litigation against
police is, unfortunately, business as
usual for law enforcement in our litigious
society. In excessive use-of-force claims,
the greater the risk of injury, the greater
the risk of liability [Ewolski v. City of
Brunswick, 287 F.3d 492 (6th Cir. 2003)].
Since the TASER device has among the
lowest risk of injury compared to other
use-of-force options, the courts have
routinely held that the use of a TASER
device by police or correction officers
does not constitute excessive use-offorce or cruel and unusual punishment.
See:
•	 Draper v. Reynolds, 369 F.3d 1270 (11th Cir. 2004)
•	 Lifton v. City of Vacaville, 72 Fed.Appx. 647, 2003 WL 21805215 	
	 (9th Cir. 2003)
•	 Ewolski v. City of Brunswick, 287 F.3d 492 (6th Cir. 2002)
•	 Jolivet v. Cook, 48 F.3d 1232 (Table), 1995 WL 94496 (10th Cir. 	
	 1995)
•	 Walker v. Sumner, 8 F.3d 33 (Table), 1993 WL 394948 (9th Cir. 	
	 1993)
•	 Hinton v. City of Elwood, 997 F.2d 774 (10th Cir. 1993)
•	 Russo v. Cincinnati, 953 F.2d 1036 (6th Cir. 1992)
•	 Caldwell v. Moore, 968 F.2d 595 (6th Cir. 1992)
•	 Michenfelder v. Sumner, 860 F.2d 328 (9th Cir. 1988)
•	 Maiorano ex rel. Maiorano v. Santiago, 2006 WL 2024951, slip op. 	
	 (M.D. Fla. July 15, 2006)
•	 Wylie v. Overby, 2006 WL 1007643, slip op. (E.D. Mich. April 14, 	
	 2006)
•	 Johnson ex rel. Smith v. City of Lincoln Park, 434 F.Supp.2d 467 	
	 (E.D. Mich. 2006)
•	 Policky v. City of Seward, 433 F.Supp.2d 1013 (D. Neb. 2006)
•	 Hernandez v. Terhume, 2000 WL 1847645 (N.D. Cal. 2000)
•	 Drummer v. Luttrell, 75 F.Supp.2d 796 (W.D. Tenn. 1999)
•	 Nicholson v. Kent County Sheriff’s Dept., 839 F.Supp. 508 (W.D. 	
	 Mich. 1993)
•	 Parker v. Asher, 701 F.Supp. 192 (D. Nev. 1988)
•	 Alford v. Osei-Kwasi, 203 Ga. App. 716 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992), cert. 	
	 denied (June 10, 1992)

“My budget is tight. How can I afford to purchase and
implement a TASER ECD program?”
A full TASER Officer Safety Program can pay for itself in
cost savings in less than a year.
FINAL IMPACT
(per officer)

A TASER Officer Safety Program is more than just an investment
in the safety of your officers and community. It’s a financial
investment that can pay for itself very quickly in hard cost
savings. Think about your last excessive use-of-force settlement,
or your annual Worker’s Compensation claims due to force
related injuries. A TASER program can’t make these problems go
away, but agency studies show a TASER program can signficantly
reduce these costs. In fact, using conservative estimates and
published law enforcement agency data, a full TASER program
(including the advanced new TASER CAM system) can pay for
itself in less than a year. With our low cost municipal financing
program, payments can be spread out over five years – and the
program can potentially generate net savings right from the first
month!

Real World Results Overview                         13

Financial costs and benefits of TASER Officer Safety Program.
OFFICER INJURY SAVINGS

At the Orange County Sheriff’s Office in Florida, the TASER Officer Safety
Program was associated with an 80% reduction in force related police officer
injuries, dropping from 120 injuries per year to 24 injuries per year. Using an
estimated cost of $5,000 per officer injury (Worker’s Compensation claims,
medical costs, and down time/lost man hours), this equates to an average
savings of $368 per officer per year.
OFFICER INJURY REDUCTION

OFFICER INJURY SAVINGS

In an analysis of the results of its first full year of a full TASER Officer Safety
Program, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg, NC Police Department’s suspect
injury rate fell by 79% – from 200 injuries in 2002 to only 42 injuries in 2004.
Assuming an average cost of $1,500 per injury (lost officer time at emergency
room, direct medical costs including EMS personnel, etc.) this reduced injury
rate likely saved the city approximately $237,000 on a department wide basis
each year.
SUSPECT INJURY REDUCTION

Case Study: Orange County Sherriff’s Office, Florida

Case Study: Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina Police Department

Number of Officers

1,305

Number of Officer Injuries Per Year Before TASER Program
Number of Officer Injuries Per Year After TASER Program
Estimated Average Cost Per Injury

120
24
$5,000

Total Savings in Officer Injury Costs

$480,000

AVERAGE INJURY SAVINGS PER OFFICER

$368

USE OF FORCE LIABILITY SAVINGS

The table below represents the results from a study by the Michigan Municipal
Risk Management Authority (see page 12 for details).

USE OF FORCE LIABILITY SAVINGS

Number of Officers
Number of Suspect Injuries Per Year Before TASER Program
Number of Suspect Injuries Per Year After TASER Program
Estimated Average Cost Per Injury
Total Savings in Suspect Injury Costs

AVERAGE INJURY SAVINGS PER OFFICER

1,524
200
42
$1,500
$237,000

$156

LIVES SAVED

Deadly force dropped from an average of nine times per year in the two years
prior to the TASER Officer Safety Program in Orange County to two times per
year in the two years after the TASER device deployment. Assuming a 50%
survival rate in deadly force encounters (Ordog, et. al, Annals of Emergency
Medicine, January, 1987), the reduction of seven deadly force incidents per
year equates to 3.5 lives saved per year.

Case Study: Michigan Municipal Risk Management Authority
Number of Agencies in Study
Number of Officers
Reduction in Excessive Force Claims
Average Cost Per Excessive Force Claims
Estimated Reduction in Wrongful Death Claims
Average Cost Per Wrongful Death Claim
Total Savings in Liability Costs

AVERAGE LIABILITY SAVINGS PER OFFICER

40
4,000
26
$250,000
3
$2,500,000
$14,000,000

LIVES SAVED
Case Study: Orange County Sherriff’s Office, Florida
Number of Officers

9

Average Deadly Force Incidents Per Year After TASER Program

2

Annual Reduction in Deadly Force Incidents
Lives Saved (Assume 50% survival)

LIVES SAVED PER OFFICER PER YEAR

See website for most current warnings.
www.TASER.com
14	

TASER Officer Safety Programs

1,305

Average Deadly Force Incidents Per Year Before TASER Program

7
3.5

0.00268

TASER Training Academy
The TASER Training Academy provides training on the use of TASER brand electronic control devices.
Training is geared toward the special needs of law enforcement officers, medical personnel, the military,
correctional officers, private citizens, professional security and instructor certification. Force options and
decision making, tactics, medical issues, weapon maintenance and personal safety are just a few of the
topics covered in the offered courses.
Located at TASER International’s headquarters in Scottsdale, Arizona, the TASER Training Academy features
a state-of-the-art classroom facility complete with 48 desks equipped with power and internet access,
safety mats, heavy bags and the IES Interactive MILO training simulator.
Some of the courses currently offered are:
•	
•	
•	
•	
•	
•	
•	
•	

TASER M26 & X26 User Course
TASER M26 & X26 Instructor Course
TASER Master Instructor Course
TASER Armorer’s Course
Relevant Medical Issues for Doctors
TASER Use of Force, Risk Management and Legal Strategies Seminar
TASER Use in the Correctional Environment
Personal Defense Course

It is a well established truth that “we fight like we train.” It is for this reason that we emphasize hands-on,
interactive and scenario-based training. Most of our courses involve some degree of physical activity and
participation. We make every effort to simulate real life stress and circumstances, to provide realistic training
to better prepare the student for success in the field. Through the use of our IES Interactive Judgement
Trainer Simulator and TASER Simulation Training Suits, we promote sound use-of-force judgement, tactics
and follow-up procedures.
Our cadre of instructors consists of active and former law enforcement officers and military trainers. Many
are internationally recognized experts in use-of-force at all levels with extensive training backgrounds.
Our instructors are committed to providing the best training possible and to forming lasting relationships
to support our students long after they leave the academy.
For more information visit www.TASER.com or call us at 800.978.2737.

Real World Results Overview                         15

TASER International headquarters is a state-of-the-art 100,000 square foot secure facility in Scottsdale, Arizona.

address: 17800 North 85th Street, Scottsdale, Arizona 85255
toll free: 800.978.2737 direct phone: 480.991.0797 fax: 480.991.0791
website: www.TASER.com email: info@TASER.com

© 2007 TASER International, Inc. TASER® and ADVANCED TASER® are registered trademarks of TASER International, Inc. AIR TASER, M26, X26, TASER CAM, and the Globe & Lightning Bolt logos are trademarks of TASER International, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

MMU0003 Rev: B